728 x 90
728 x 90
728 x 90
728 x 90
728 x 90

Signing_of_Constitution_Chandler_Christy_smThe Constitutional Studies Center combines careful, objective scholarship into the original understanding of the Constitution with advocacy for human freedom under law. It produces books, issue papers, articles, and legal briefs reporting the results of its research. Since 2010, the Center has had enormous influence on constitutional law cases and commentary, but also on policy makers and grass roots activists. For example, the Center’s research findings galvanized the massive and growing “Article V” movement to restore constitutional limits on the federal government.

Latest Posts

  • House Rules Committee: “Violate Your Oath No Matter How You Vote!”0

    • March 15, 2012

    It’s a stunning betrayal of all those hardworking, pro-Constitution Americans who gave U.S. House Republicans their majority. Republicans controlling the House Rules Committee have added sweeping new mandates on the states to a bill repealing part of Obamacare. The result is revised H.R. 5. Just on good government grounds, those two very different items do

  • Why an Amendments Convention is not a “Constitutional Convention”0

    • March 4, 2012

    Sometimes a convention for proposing amendments to the U.S. Constitution is referred to as a “constitutional convention.” That title is both wrong and fatally misleading. The correct name—given by the Constitution itself—is convention for proposing amendments. Other accurate names are amendments convention, Article V convention, or convention of the states. In the Founding Era and

  • The Great Forgetting0

    • February 26, 2012

    The Constitution was created in a special legal environment. The Founders were raised with a particular educational canon. They also had certain common experiences. During the 19th century, important details about those matters began to slip away. Constitutional law forgot them. In other words, information crucial to understanding 18th century words was lost during the 19th

  • II files unique Supreme Court brief in Obamacare case0

    • February 16, 2012

    We have just filed an amicus curiae (“friend of the court”) brief with the Supreme Court arguing that (1) under current Supreme Court rulings, Obamacare’s individual mandate, if it can be justified at all, must be justified under the Constitution’s Necessary and Proper Clause, and (2) scholarly research into the meaning of the Necessary and

  • Contraceptives and Catholic hospitals: The primary issue is Obamacare, not the First Amendment0

    • February 12, 2012

    Does the mandate forcing Catholic hospitals to offer abortifacients and contraception violate the First Amendment? The surprising answer is: Probably not. True, there are serious moral and political issues inherent in requiring religious institutions to offer “treatments” they find theologically offensive. But, despite the claims of many Catholic and conservative commentators, the U.S. Department of

  • Are the detainment provisions of the 2012 National Defense Authorization Act serious?0

    • February 5, 2012

    Are the detainment provisions of the 2012 National Defense Authorization Act serious? Yes they are. This is a complicated area, and there has been a lot of word-fudging in spinning this subject. So bear with me as we take things step by step. *    The U.S. Constitution generally guarantees the “Privilege of the Writ of


Get the latest edition of the popular work, The Original Constitution: What It Actually Said and Meant. You can buy it in either hard copy or Kindle form here.


Rob Natelson, Senior Fellow, Constitutional Jurisprudence
Email: rob.natelson1@gmail.com
Phone: 303-279-6536, ext 114